Kentwood Committees & Boards
Planning Commission (Back to index)
Minutes for 09/27/2005APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE KENTWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMISSION CHAMBERS
September 27, 2005, 7:30 P.M.
A. Chair Bohn called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
B. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner McIntyre-Evenocheck.
C. Roll Call:
Members Present: Betsy Artz, Maggie Bohn, Todd Gray, Dan Holtrop (arrived 7:40), Nancy McIntyre-Evenocheck, Ed Swanson, Frank Vander Hoff, and Chris Winczewski.
Members Absent: Abed Itani.
Others Present: City Attorney Jeff Sluggett, Community Development Director Terry Schweitzer, Economic Development Planner Lisa Golder, City Clerk Dan Kasunic, Planner Joe Pung, Planner Debargha Sengupta, the press and approximately 20 citizens.
Motion by McIntyre-Evenocheck, supported by Gray, to excuse Commissioner Itani from the meeting.
- Motion Carried. (7-0)
- Itani absent.
D. Approval of the Minutes and Findings of Fact
Motion by Gray, supported by Vander Hoff, to approve the Minutes of September 13, 2005, and the Findings of Fact for: Case #30-05 Republic Bank, Site Plan Review and Special Land Use-Financial Institution; Case #31-05 52nd Street Auto Spa, Site Plan Review and Special Land Use-Vehicle Wash and Drive-up Service Establishment, located on the south side of 52nd Street, approximately 520 feet east of Eastern Avenue (900-52nd Street).
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani absent-
E. Approval of the Agenda
Motion by McIntyre-Evenocheck, supported by VanderHoff, to approve the agenda for the September 27, 2005, meeting.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani absent-
F. Acknowledge visitors wishing to speak to non-agenda items.
There was no public comment.
G. Old Business
There was no old business.
H. Public Hearing
Case #32-05 East Paris Professional Complex, Rezoning of 4.92 acres from R1-C Single Family Residential to OPUD Office Planned Unit Development, located on the Southeast side of Burton Street and East Paris Avenue.
Sengupta explained the request is for: a rezoning of 4.92 acres from R1-C to OPUD; for an office building of approximately 70,000 sq. ft.; is a combination of six (6) parcels; and is under the minimum requirement of 5 acres for which the applicant will be asking for a deviation. He stated the during the LUZ Committee discussion on this project the main issue was if the mixed use recommended in the City?s Master Plan was feasible and suggested the City contact the land owner to the south to check out the possibility of joining in on a PUD. The committee concluded if the two sites were not combined in a unified PUD, the applicants could proceed with office use on the corner. Staff subsequently contacted the land owner and learned that they had no immediate plans for development. He explained the Master Plan recommends a mixed use of residential and office; however, the plan presented did not have any element of residential. Other issues discussed at the work session were: shared access drive to the south of the property; pedestrian connections; public spaces around wetlands; traffic circulation; tree retention; and visual impact upon residents. A bus turn-out had been included within the site plan. Staff recommendations are to approve with conditions that Sengupta reviewed.
Holtrop arrived at 8:10 P.M.
Doug Stalsonberg, Exxel Engineering, represented the applicant. He explained the building size and design. He stated there will be two separate wings for two clients with 20 percent of the parking below ground. He noted the bus turn-out lane was offered with limitations and walking trails for the wet lands have been added. A wet pond with fountain was added at the request of the owner. They revised the parking to allow for preservation of trees resulting in a loss of parking spaces and they will be requesting a deviation to the PUD. There was also a change to the width of the greenbelt; however, a greenbelt island has been added. He explained the proposed driveway location. He noted they will be incorporating underground storm water detention, useable open space and a turn lane. Bill Cox, architect for the project explained the building design was due to the twelve (12) foot grade drop within the site and displayed the building design elements.
Chair Bohn opened the public hearing.
Bill Pipe, 4100 Burton had a question regarding the lighting levels, noting the adjacent MVP facility that gives off a lot of lighting and is on 24 hours. Staff noted that lighting level must be reviewed and approved by staff. Shaun Nicholson, 4074 Burton, stated concern on the lighting standard. Bob Ajey, associated with the church property to the west across East Paris Avenue, voiced his concern with the amount of water being displaced by the development and to explain where the water will flow. Doug Stalsonberg explained any further development would require stormwater detention. The overall site is made up of previously platted lots with an easement on record and he understood the stormwater pipe was abandoned; if it is still in place, they will relocate the pipe around the building.
Motion by Vander Hoff, supported by Artz, to close the public hearing.
- Motion Carried (8-0)
- Itani absent-
Vander Hoff liked the plan and preferred to leave the drive where it was shown on the plan.
Gray wanted the drive moved to the south as it made more sense, but he preferred not to impose that as a requirement.
Winczewski wanted to know if the building could be smaller so the City did not have to make concessions. He expressed gratitude that the neighbors came to the meeting.
McIntyre-Evenocheck questioned why the drive should be moved to the south. Sengupta explained the suggestion to move the drive to the south was both for safety and convenience for access to the property to the south. She had concerns with the round- about and drivers not moving in the proper direction upon entering the property. She liked all the design and site elements; however, she wanted the recommendation of staff followed. She asked staff to check into the MVP lighting complaint.
Swanson stated he had to look at City development not just site development in regards to placement of the drive and concurred with staff in the recommendation to move the drive to the south. He stated the bus turn-out should not be where it is shown and needs to be re-worked.
Artz asked about the kind of trees facing the residents. Stalsonberg stated there is not much vegetation; however, they will be planting 12 foot pine trees along the common lot line.
Holtrop asked why they were proposing a building of 70,000 square feet. The developer stated that they have commitments for the entire 70,000 square feet of building area. He asked if the bus turn-out is south of the drive, does the developer still bear any cost. Staff replied they could. He asked about the sight view of residents to the building. Stalsonberg displayed a cross-section to illustrate what the residents will see of the development.
Bohn felt the drive should be moved to the south for safety reasons. She spoke on the Master Plan and the intent for the property to be mixed use and by not fulfilling the plan, we would be setting precedence which she personally cannot accept.
McIntyre-Evenocheck asked for opinions of staff on bus turn-out. Schweitzer stated concern with the location as shown and would prefer to move it further south. She noted a prospective change to condition 5 of the Site Plan to read ?for the need of bus turn-out location to ITP?.
Vander Hoff asked how could the Planning Commission justify voting for this project when it goes against the Master Plan. Schweitzer stated that taking into account property depth which is not optimum for a residential component, the larger than expected amount of wetlands, the water course making the residential component not as suitable and when applying the Master Plan in terms of site development, it is a mitigating factor to support this kind of development.
Motion by Swanson, supported by Vander Hoff, to recommend to the City Commission approval with conditions of the rezoning of 4.92 acres as described in Case #32-05 from R1-C Single Family Residential to OPUD Office Planned Unit Development with conditions 1 through 10 modifying condition 5 to read ?The need for the bus turnout lane location and associated geometrics is subject to approval by the ITP. ?, Basis points 1 through 12 and add the phrase ?Item G? to Condition 2, located on the southeast side of Burton Street and East Paris Avenue.
- Motion Carried (7-1)
- Bohn dissenting-
- Itani absent-
Motion by Swanson, supported by Vander Hoff, to recommend to the City Commission approval of the Preliminary Site Plan for East Paris Professional Complex Case as described in #32-05 as per Site Plan dated July 28, 2005 and as revised on September 20, 2005 with conditions 1 through 9 with correction to Condition 3 and Basis Points 1 through 8 as outlined in Sengupta?s memo dated September 21, 2005
- Motion Carried (7-1)
- Winczewski dissenting-
- Itani absent-
Stalsonberg requested a clarification on the condition relating to a shared drive with the property to the south. Bohn and Sluggett suggested working with staff on any modification to the final site plan when it is being submitted for subsequent Planning Commission action.
Case #33-05 GR Cars by Owner, Site Plan Review and Special Land Use-Open Air Business-Vehicle Sales, located at 5990 S. Division Avenue.
Pung introduced the request noting two issues to be addressed, those being the southern most drive that requires approval of the ZBA in order to be located within 150 of the 60th Street and Division intersection and the need for the applicants to have a Class D (Brokers) license approved by the State. He stated regarding staff recommendations that 8(b) needs to read?and will have green grass in the spring. And 10(a) ?the garage will be removed within one month from the date of approval. The staff?s recommendation is to approve the Open Air and site plan with conditions.
Troy Austin, applicant, and Scott Morey, owner, were present.
Bohn opened the public hearing.
There was no public comment.
Motion by Vander Hoff, supported by Gray, to close the public hearing.
-Motion Carried- (8-0)
-Itani absent-
McIntyre-Evenocheck asked about the maximum parking spaces and about who would be present for customer assistance. Pung explained how the parking designation works and the applicant stated he will be present during the day for customers.
Motion by Holtrop, supported by Vander Hoff, to grant conditional approval of the Special Land Use-Open Air Business-Vehicle Sales, located at 5990 S. Division Avenue as described in Case #33-05. Approval is conditioned upon conditions 1 through 4 and to modify the September 20, 2005 applicant statement 8b ??? will have grass in spring? and add to 10a?? to remove garage one month from approval? and basis points 1- 5.
- Motion Carried (8-0)
- Itani absent-
Motion by Holtrop, Supported by McIntyre-Evenocheck to recommend approval of the Site Plan Review for GR Cars by Owners, as described in Case #33-05. Approval is conditioned upon conditions 1 through 5 and basis points 1 through 4.
- Motion Carried (8-0)
- Itani absent-
Case #34-05 Woodhaven Condominiums, Major Change to an Approved Site Plan, located on the east side of Walma Avenue, south of 44th Street.
Golder introduced the request for the Major Change involving a reduction to 97 housing units and changing all roads except Wildflower extension to private streets from public roads. She also noted the work session discussion on how to accommodate for traffic calming along Wildflower Lane. She stated this is recommended for approval conditioned on legal review of the Master Deed Development Agreement and a change of the PUD statement to reflect the reduction of houses. She noted condition 6 to build a temporary walk way along Walma Ave.
Doug Stalsonberg, Exxel Engineering, stated the amount of houses has been reduced to 97 due to the location of a needed extension of the sanitary sewer. He addressed the staffs? recommendation regarding a stand-up curb as having no benefit as a traffic calming device and asked to eliminate the condition for the curb. Aaron Jonker, representing the builder, was present.
Chair Bohn opened the public hearing.
Jeff Greenfield, 4579 Haywood, asked if the garages were still flush to the houses and if the tree line and detention areas planned along the east line of the site were consistent with the preliminary layout.
Doug Stalsonberg stated under the current design there will be 1/3 of the homes with the porch forward and 2/3 garage forward. He displayed two illustrations of the building elevations. Consistent with the preliminary plan there are two (2) detention ponds on site and the tree line would be preserved along the east line of the site.
Mark Dreisbach, 4676 Morningside Drive, asked about sidewalks and the timeframe for installation along Walma Ave. He stated his concerns with the increase of traffic due to the development onto Walma and asked for sidewalks stressing the need to have it in place prior to completing the first phase of the development.
Motion by McIntyre-Evenocheck, supported by Artz, to close the public hearing.
-Motion Carried- (8-0)-
-Itani absent-
McIntyre-Evenocheck stated the Commission does take into consideration Mr. Deisbach?s concerns. She stated the curb, in her opinion, does not seem to work to calm traffic. She expressed her concern that all the houses will be the same color. Mr. Jonker stated it is the customer choice as to the color but they have a varied palette form which to choose.
Winczewski asked about where the bus stops are located and asked if the one by the intersection could be moved. He hoped the City would have Walma upgraded prior to the development completion.
Gray wanted to eliminate condition 5 and wanted some kind of walkway in place as soon as possible.
Swanson stated the staff needs to work through the problem with having some kind of traffic calming device. He stated five (5) years is too long before a sidewalk is built.
Artz agreed with every one.
Holtrop asked when a temporary sidewalk could be installed. Staff stated the Planning Commission could assign a time but there would be design requirements on a temporary walkway installed within the public right of way.
Bohn stated she would like a pathway installed sooner than 2011.
McIntyre-Evenocheck stated a compromise of a pathway from Wildflower south to the Justice Center in place of requiring the entire length as suggested from Mr. Dreisbach.
Motion by McIntyre-Evenocheck, supported by Swanson, to recommend to the City Commission approval of the Major Change to an Approved Site Plan Case #34-05 for Woodhaven Condominiums, dated September 19, 2005, located on the east side of Walma Avenue, south of 44th Street with conditions 1 through 4 omitting 5, changing 6 applicant should make provision for pedestrian traffic by (a) constructing, from Wildflower to the Justice Center property line at its cost, a walkway adjacent to the Walma Ave. right of way, at a location, width and of a material approved by the City, concurrent with improvement to Wildflower Lane, and (b) by providing a performance guarantee, in a form approved by the City, to ensure the construction of sidewalks along Walma from Wildflower Lane to the parcel?s north property line at such time as Walma is improved to final grade (estimated to be 2011). This provision shall be detailed in the development agreement to be approved by both the developer and City and Basis Points 1 through 4 omitting point 2 per Golder?s memo dated September 27, 2005.
- Motion Carried (8-0)
- Itani absent-
I. Work Session
Case #35-05 Breton Woods North-Phase II ?In the Woods?, Final Site Plan Review and PUD Phase Approval, located on the south side of Pfeiffer Woods Drive approximately ? mile west of Shaffer Avenue.
Golder introduced the request of a 71 acre development with 193 units.
Bob Israel and Doug Stalsonberg were present with no comment.
McIntyre-Evenocheck asked how the large hill along Breton at Pfeiffer Woods Drive will be landscaped. Mr. Israel indicated that a stone wall would be installed at the base of the hill at the entrance and that there is grass on the entire hill. He indicated that trees had already been planted on the hill and that the grass on the hill was already being mowed weekly.
J. New Business
Motion by Holtrop, supported by McIntyre-Evenocheck, to set the public hearing date of October 25, 2005, for: Case # 36-05 Stormy Creek Farms, Final Site Plan Review of a PUD, located on east side of Shaffer, south of 32nd Street; Case #37-05 T-Mobile, Site Plan Review of a Cellular Tower, located at 4400 Potter (City Water Tank and Pump Station Site).
- Motion Carried (8-0)
- Itani absent-
K. Other Business
1. Commissioners? Comments
Holtrop stated due to soccer practice he was here late and will be absent for the next two (2) meetings. He wanted to know when the sidewalks on 60th Street will be completed. Schweitzer noted right of way needed to be acquired prior to completion.
Artz stated she will not be able to attend the next meeting on October 11th.
Swanson stated he will be having surgery on October 25th.
Bohn asked Schweitzer about the MSU online program. He said he will look into the program and let her know.
2. Staff?s Comments
Lisa noted the CBS proposal for rezoning was denied by City Commission and it will be reviewed by Planning Commission at the next LUZ meeting as part of a PUD from Breton over to Old Farm Office Park.
Sengupta stated the shared drive proposal for the East Paris Project was given to Stalsonberg in an e-mail prior to the meeting.
L. Adjournment
Motion by Vander Hoff, supported by McIntyre-Evenocheck, to adjourn the meeting.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Itani absent-
Meeting adjourned at 10:04 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy McIntyre-Evenocheck, Secretary
|